click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
the sequestered . but did so by impacted the pentagon less heavily than the sequestered it. but divided government, i think you get the question. president said he does not want to change the money for the pentagon. mitch mcconnell said we are not raising taxes to ransom the pentagon budget cuts. a lot of focus has been on the pentagon but these are more concerned about the $50 billion in domestic discretionary spending restraint every year. you did to the republican study committee. the announced all a thing worse than sequestration would not be having savings. this stampede attempted did not take. he denied a demand that the defense budget be remain untouched, either of the public opinion or the house. i think sequestration happens. the only thing i could imagine is if they -- the r's and d's would both rather take it out of entitlements rather than the annual budgets. could they cut a deal where they save the same amount of money but out of entitlements? that is the only compromise i could see. then you get to the grand bargain idea. it seems every time i have these conversations were people as
for the pentagon and fluctuations in global energy prices can have dramatic, dramatic effects on defense spending. for every $10 increase in a barrel of oil it costs the american military annually an extra $1.3 billion. recognizing the potential instability that d.o.d.'s current energy needs can cause, military experts from across the various branches of the armed services have begun looking at ways to cut energy use and find energy alternative. now, i continued to hear all of this discussion about how this is somehow a green agenda and it's a suber havesive plot and it's being forced on a resistant president. and i just want to take a minute or two, mr. president, and say i don't think anything could be further from the truth and just wanted to describe for a moment why i feel that way. first, those who oppose defense energy initiatives often argue in today's fiscal environment, the country can't afford to waste money on energy programs when it's necessary to provide for our nation's security. i don't believe, mr. president, it is an either/or proposition, because my view is that an investment i
. >>> some fascinating new information from the pentagon contains details we never knew before about the killing of osama bin laden. cnn's brian todd has been reading newly released e-mails that fill in some of the gaps in the story of what happened. >> reporter: tense and very secretive transmissions as the aircraft carrier waits for the body of osama bin laden. it's may 2, 2011, the al qaeda leader has just been killed. two u.s. navy admirals use code words to describe bin laden. the commander says fed ex delivered the package, both trucks are safely on route home base. the e-mails heavily redakted have just been released by the defense department responding to a freedom of information act washdog. a few days earlier that strike dog asked do i need any special religious ceremonial preparations. after bin laden's buried at sea, an admiral describes the scene. tradition traditional procedures for islamic burial was followed. the deceased body was washed then placed in a white sheet then a military officer read prepared religious remarks which were translated into arabic. tipped up wh
brought all these cases to the attention of the pentagon. the secretary of the army responded with an assurance that our flag would be flown at army installations whenever the flags of the states are on display. and many of the individual installations i mentioned took corrective action when i contacted them. but despite this response, i continue to receive reports of situations where territorial flags are forgotten. see, the problem is there is no uniform regulation governing the inclusion of the flags of the district of columbia and the territories, though the secretary -- army secretary said it is the policy of the air force, the coast guards, the marines and the navy to let local commanders have the discretion to display state flags. with or without the flags of the territories on their installations. i have requested that the service modify their regulations to include our flags but no action has been taken. and i believe it should not be at the discretion of individual base commanders to decide to exclude any part of the united states. or the fighting men and women from
on social media sites. >> recently vice president joe biden was in attendance at a pentagon announcement of a new virginia class fast-attack navy submarine that'll be called the uss delaware. it's expected to be launch inside 2018. speaking at this 20-minute briefing were second lady jill biden, navy secretary ray mabus and delaware senator tom carper. >> thank you all for coming today to the navy ship naming announcement. today's briefing will consist of statements only, there will be no questions and answers following the statement. along with secretary of the navy ray mabus, today we are honored to be joined by second lady, dr. jill biden, and her special guest, her husband, vice president biden. [laughter] senator tom carper and lieutenant governor matt denn. thank you all for being here today, and if you're all ready, i will turn it over to secretary ray mabus, our 75th secretary of the navy. >> well, thank you all for being here. i particularly want to thank dr. biden for being here, senior senator from delaware, tom carper, and the lieutenant governor of delaware, matt denn. and,
the sequester, that's good, less spending. i'm in favor of looking at the pentagon spending and reforming how you get it and get the same amount of dollars. look at the government spending. >> not a common republican position. >> more common than you think, but it's not common in the appropriations committee that does armed services. i talked to one of the key guys over there and said how can i help you reform the pentagon? there must have been -- >> i bet congressmen love getting that call, grover norquist, how can i help? >> i start meetings that way. want to make the government more efficient, make it cost less and we are everybody's friend on that subject. ralph nader and i were lobbying the bush administration back in 2001. >> what about the second cliff, the bush tax cuts? >> i think -- you get towards the end in a thing and if the republicans have played it right, they said look, push it out a month or two weeks so you should never actually go over these things, just as you do with continuing resolutions. say, look, give it a week, two months. >> the president is not going to extend. h
government is money borrowed to sustain food stamps as well as the pentagon. we ought to be thinking of that in terms of our values and our future. let me speak to a couple of elements here that i think progressives should keep in mind. progressives cannot afford to stand on the sidelines in this fiscal cliff debate. important critical decisions will be made soon that will affect this country for 10 years. i think we need to be a part of this conversation. we need to be open to some topics and some issues that are painful and hard for us to talk about. we cannot stand by the sidelines in denial that this is ever going to engage us in the things we value. we cannot be so night -- not leave to believe that just taxing the rich will solve our problems. i believe that is an important part of a solution. we have to look to reform and change that is significant, that preserves many of the values and programs that brought us political life, and we cannot believe that merely ignoring these programs or not engaging will solve the problem. pick up any of the newspapers and look for the full-pa
of power today, it is the size of the pentagon and those devil is actually had a bigger problem than us. but i would be interested in when you're thinking about policy, do you look at that the source of leverage, or did this restrain american options in terms of what you can do? >> with respect to the deficit and debt of the national security liability, we need our senior leadership and the ability to take it on. we have an opportunity to do so, we have a requirement to do so. the requirement and foundation of national power is ultimately economic in terms of global influence. and in terms of supporting the military. we have, i think, members of the house will step up in the coming months. >> how did you look at your surplus of the united states? do they say that we have america under control because of the treasury? >> superposition to the united states is very important. it is very decisive. so there is no intention for us with this economic relationship. >> i'm going to open it up to the floor. we have four microphones around the room. josh grogan is over here. >> thank you very muc
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8